Conflict Identified as Crypto.com Trading on its Own Platform

Dispute Embroils Bitget in Legal Battle With Crypto InfluencerBitget, the crypto exchange registered in Seychelles, finds itself entangled in a legal dispute with prominent crypto influencer Evan Luthra.Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on UnsplashAccount freezing allegationsThe conflict stems from Luthra’s allegations of account freezing and loss of funds after a token listing incident in March. Luthra has filed a lawsuit against Bitget, accusing the exchange of withholding $200,000 in Tether (USDT) without adequate explanation, while also freezing his account.The legal drama follows Luthra’s involvement with the Reel Star project, where he served as an advisor for the platform which is aimed at creators. As compensation for his collaboration with the project, Luthra received Reel Token (REELT), the project’s utility token.Bitget alleged market manipulationUpon the listing of REELT tokens, Luthra reportedly sold 1.3 million tokens on Bitget. In response, Bitget claims it faced a manipulative attack orchestrated by a group of traders attempting to profit from market manipulation immediately after the token’s listing. This allegedly caused a significant drop in the token’s price, prompting Bitget’s decision to freeze Luthra’s account.Bitget states that it contacted Luthra seeking an explanation for the suspicious trading behavior. Luthra acknowledged the token sale but failed to provide satisfactory reasons for his actions, according to Bitget’s version of events. The exchange maintains that user protection is its foremost priority and that it takes swift action against illegal or fraudulent behaviors.$16 million damages claimLuthra refutes the allegations, asserting his innocence and citing alleged approval from Reel Star’s Co-Founder Navdeep Sharma for his token sale plans. He seeks a substantial $16 million in damages, in addition to the frozen funds. Luthra claims that Bitget unjustly deprived him of his tokens, asserting his status as a fully KYCed user entitled to access his holdings.In the aftermath of the incident, Bitget conducted an investigation and offered a compensation plan for affected clients. Gracy Chen, Bitget’s Managing Director, emphasized the exchange’s commitment to user protection and its actions against illicit activities on its platform. Addressing the matter on Twitter, Chen didn’t hold back in her commentary on Luthra, stating that he “has a history of fraudulent activities,” which she says were exposed by crypto journalist CoffeeZilla.The legal dispute has ignited debates within the crypto community. Supporters of Luthra contend that his case underscores broader issues faced by users of centralized exchanges, shedding light on the need for improved user rights and protection. On the other hand, some argue that Bitget acted appropriately to safeguard its users and the market integrity.CZ brought into the disputeThe legal battle has attracted attention from influential figures in the crypto industry. Against a backdrop of a very public airing of the dispute on Twitter, in a recent tweet Luthra invited Changpeng Zhao (CZ), the CEO of Binance, to respond to Luthra’s claim that Bitget spreads rumors about other exchanges. CZ was having none of it, writing: “You should talk to them, right? We are not a regulator for other exchanges.”The case highlights the intricate challenges surrounding market manipulation and token listings within the crypto space. As it unfolds, the outcome could potentially set a precedent for similar situations involving token listings, market manipulation, and user protection.

Chinese Fentanyl Producers Taking Payment in CryptoA report produced by blockchain analytics and crypto compliance solutions firm Elliptic has found that most Chinese suppliers of fentanyl precursors are accepting payments for the illicit material in cryptocurrency.In a blog post published on its website on Tuesday, Elliptic claimed that 90 percent of the 90 China-based firms, from which its researchers received offers of fentanyl precursors, accepted cryptocurrency as a form of payment. The majority of fentanyl which is trafficked into the United States is manufactured using imported fentanyl precursors like the material that the Elliptic researchers were offered.Seventeen of the suppliers even offered to provide fentanyl itself. Others still offered to supply synthetic opioids, equally or more potent than fentanyl, which are currently legal to both produce and supply within China.Photo by Hal Gatewood on UnsplashTracking blockchain transactionsIn tracing back transactions relative to these illicit suppliers, the Elliptic researchers’ analysis demonstrated that the digital asset wallets used by the rogue suppliers have received thousands of payments. The research team has estimated the net worth of those transactions to total $27 million.It appears that a move towards crypto payments is trending with this group of suppliers as there has been a 450% increase year-on-year when it comes to payments for fentanyl precursor using crypto.The study highlighted activity related to Dutch national Alex Peijnenburg. An alleged fentanyl supplier, Peijnenburg, made an $85,000 payment in crypto to one of the ninety fentanyl precursor suppliers identified by Elliptic researchers. In November of last year, the Dutchman was sanctioned by US authorities relative to his activities.Global trade and distributionThe report stated: “During our correspondence, the suppliers showed no concerns about how the chemical would be used, with some explaining that it was their best-selling product and could be used to produce fentanyl.”It went on to state that “others pointedly mentioned that they had sold it to customers in Mexico.” Mexico is a significant location in the global drugs trade, given the activity of drug cartels within the country. One supplier offered an insight to researchers as to the preferences of their nefarious Mexican clients, stating: “They always use USDT or Bitcoin to pay. It is no problem.”While it looks like these nefarious Chinese companies are able to trade into and out of crypto assets, that should be a difficulty for them as China banned the offering of crypto trading services going back a number of years already. Furthermore, foreign digital asset exchanges are prohibited from servicing the needs of Chinese clients where crypto is concerned.Elliptic’s research team uncovered that the majority of the illicit drugs trade suppliers have been using workarounds in order to gain access to overseas digital asset exchanges. The suppliers have used intermediaries in order to convert crypto into Chinese yuan.The report concludes that this part of the international fentanyl trade can be dealt with and “disrupted by the services that act as gateways into and out of crypto assets.” On arriving at that conclusion, Elliptic has acted by notifying the digital asset exchanges that these suppliers are using. “[We] have flagged hundreds of crypto addresses in our tools as being linked to this activity,” the report states.Crypto had infamously been associated with illicit activity on the dark web in its earliest years. It has moved well beyond that although due to its decentralized nature, it’s difficult, if not impossible, to control who utilizes decentralized digital currency.

Upbit Accidentally Accepts Counterfeit APT Tokens, Initiates Retrieval EffortsUpbit, South Korea’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, is reported to have accepted deposits of counterfeit Aptos (APT) tokens, mistaking them for their legitimate counterparts. The exchange has been reaching out to the sellers of these tokens by phone, requesting their recovery. This news has been circulating in several online crypto communities since the afternoon of September 24 (Korea Standard Time).Photo by Kenny Eliason on UnsplashUpbit’s responsesOn September 24 at 15:47 KST, Upbit announced a temporary suspension of deposit and withdrawal services for APT due to maintenance on the APT wallet. Following this, at 22:32 KST on the same day, Upbit explained that system maintenance was undertaken after identifying an unusual attempt linked to APT deposits. The crypto exchange went on to announce that the deposit and withdrawal services for APT would resume at 23:00 KST on the same day.DeFi degenerates’ insightsIn relation to this incident, Definalist, a group of DeFi degenerates based in Korea, shared insights on X (formerly Twitter). The group stated: “It seems that during the process of reflecting $APT coin deposits, there was a failure to check the type arguments, and all same functions transfers were recognized as the same APT native token. … If all APT ecosystem tokens were sent to Upbit’s wallet, they would have been mistakenly treated as APT native coins.”Decimal place differenceDefinalist also remarked on the fortunate nature of the counterfeit APT token having six decimal places, in contrast to the authentic APT token’s eight. They noted that if the deceptive token had mirrored the genuine token’s decimal places, the market disruption could have amplified a hundredfold. Meanwhile, the value of the counterfeit APT tokens deposited into Upbit is estimated to be about KRW 20 million (approximately $15,000).